What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn (10 Viewers)

In what universe is it OK for the POTUS to meet with Putin secretly and destroy any recording or notes from the meeting?  Consider the following:

(1) Warnings and evidence of election interference

(2) Formal sanctions

(3) Ongoing criminal investigations, prosecutions, and convictions

(4) Historical relationship between the USA and Russia as foes

I just don't understand how these "meetings" can be rationalized away as harmless or necessary, and why permanently deleting any history of the "meetings" is justified.  Looking at it generously towards Trump, it's extremely reckless.  Looking at it more critically, it's treasonous.

 
Sweet J said:
I don’t think there is any doubt that Trump is comprised. Now I’m having to give serious consideration that people like Graham are too. These are crazy times. 
Click to expand...
I think it's easier to assume that Trump is an idiot and is being used by Russia (and China) to destabilize the U.S. and Graham realizes this and is seeing the Republican party dragged down with Trump and will do anything to save it.

 
AAABatteries said:
I think it's easier to assume that Trump is an idiot and is being used by Russia (and China) to destabilize the U.S. and Graham realizes this and is seeing the Republican party dragged down with Trump and will do anything to save it.
Click to expand...
This is a confusing post. Previously a Trump critic, Graham is now his biggest ally in the Senate. If Trump is dragging the Republican party down, how does enabling him help it?

 
Mookie said:
In what universe is it OK for the POTUS to meet with Putin secretly and destroy any recording or notes from the meeting?  Consider the following:

(1) Warnings and evidence of election interference

(2) Formal sanctions

(3) Ongoing criminal investigations, prosecutions, and convictions

(4) Historical relationship between the USA and Russia as foes

I just don't understand how these "meetings" can be rationalized away as harmless or necessary, and why permanently deleting any history of the "meetings" is justified.  Looking at it generously towards Trump, it's extremely reckless.  Looking at it more critically, it's treasonous.
Click to expand...
I know I like to do this every so often but:

Let's just imagine the Fox News crowd had Obama or Hillary destroyed notes from a meeting with any foreign leader, much less the leader of a nation who just attacked us.

They'd be standing at the White House with pitchforks as we speak.

 
lakerstan said:
Don’t forget about the “sex coach”, Anastasia Vashukevich, from Belarus sitting in a prison in Thailand with supposed evidence.
Click to expand...
Update: Vashukevich is being deported. It's not clear if this means Belarus her home country or Russia where she was living.

Vashukevich indicated she would turn over the recordings she claimed to have if the U.S. could help secure her release, but later withdrew the offer, suggesting that she and Deripaska had reached an agreement.
Click to expand...

 
BobbyLayne said:
This is a confusing post. Previously a Trump critic, Graham is now his biggest ally in the Senate. If Trump is dragging the Republican party down, how does enabling him help it?
Click to expand...
Lots of Republicans were Trumps critics before he was elected and some even after.  They change with the wind.  You really think an easier explanation is Graham is compromised?  I'm not even saying he is or he isn't - I'm just talking what is the easier explanation.  They are doing what they can to keep themselves and their party relevant and in power.  Most everything else becomes secondary. 

As for enabling him - I think a good number of Republican politicians are just hoping to run out the clock on Trump's presidency.  Pray he doesn't do something even more dumb than he already has and then the day after he doesn't get re-elected they will trash him.

 
Put another way - the damage to the Republican party is pretty severe either way - but I think their thinking is it's worse if he gets impeached than if he just doesn't get re-elected.  They get their cake and eat it too for the next 2 years and hope that there's enough Republicans who hated Trump will come back in to the fold after he's gone.  What else are they supposed to do - grow a backbone and have the moral fiber to stand up to him?  Not going to happen and honestly I wouldn't expect that to happen from 90% or more of politicians in similar situations.  I don't like it but it's what I believe.

 
I mean, come on - do we really think Republicans are going to continue to side with Trump once he's gone and his usefulness to them is over (SC justices)?  They all hated him before he was elected - they'll hate him after he's gone.  I think that's one of the minor flaws in Democrats thinking - that the Republican base won't shift ideas and position to whoever is the next 'R'.  They hate liberals and D's more than having a true set of ideals they believe in.  The problem for Republicans is the group of people that buy in to what they are currently selling is dwindling - they will have to shift in the long-term.  In the short term they may continue with this nationalism and anti-immigration crap but it's not a long-term winning strategy. 

Hell, I can see it now - in 10 years the next Bernie will come along and Tim will be a Republican again because the Democrats are too progressive and anti-capitalism and the R's finally shifted to be more moderate.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Banger said:
so sad...couldn't happen to a nice crook...

Cheri Jacobus‏Verified account @CheriJacobus

Report: Devin Nunes Under Investigation By Robert Mueller @highbrow_nobrow

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/report-devin-nunes-under-investigation-by-robert-mueller-5c-aZbXSiU2BshKVhQnuZw/?utm_source=Amplify&utm_medium=Intellectualist&utm_campaign=Twitter&utm_term=Cheri
Click to expand...
Besides Trump, there's no one I'd rather see rot in a prison cell than Devin Nunes.

 
It comes down to politics, simple as that IMO.

The GOP isn't getting off the Trump train until the moment it is no longer politically wise to do so, and not a second sooner.

Not for the good of the country.

Not to uphold the law.

Not to "save" the GOP.

They'll do it if it means they get re-elected because of it.

Nothing else matters.

 
NEW: Senate just BLOCKED a Chuck Schumer measure that would prevent the Trump admin from lifting sanctions on three firms linked to Russian oligarch and Putin ally Oleg Deripaska. The vote in the GOP-led Senate was 57-42, short of the 60 needed to move it to a final vote.

These 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to advance the Schumer resolution related to sanctions on Russian firms *Boozman *Collins *Cotton *Daines *Gardner *Hawley *Kennedy *Moran *McSally *Rubio *Sasse

The Twitters

 
dozer said:
NEW: Senate just BLOCKED a Chuck Schumer measure that would prevent the Trump admin from lifting sanctions on three firms linked to Russian oligarch and Putin ally Oleg Deripaska. The vote in the GOP-led Senate was 57-42, short of the 60 needed to move it to a final vote.

These 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to advance the Schumer resolution related to sanctions on Russian firms *Boozman *Collins *Cotton *Daines *Gardner *Hawley *Kennedy *Moran *McSally *Rubio *Sasse

The Twitters
Click to expand...
I'd sure love to hear the reasoning from those that opposed...

Seriously though, how do you explain that vote?

 
dozer said:
NEW: Senate just BLOCKED a Chuck Schumer measure that would prevent the Trump admin from lifting sanctions on three firms linked to Russian oligarch and Putin ally Oleg Deripaska. The vote in the GOP-led Senate was 57-42, short of the 60 needed to move it to a final vote.

These 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to advance the Schumer resolution related to sanctions on Russian firms *Boozman *Collins *Cotton *Daines *Gardner *Hawley *Kennedy *Moran *McSally *Rubio *Sasse

The Twitters
Click to expand...
is this "good" or "bad"  

I mean can he not lift sanctions or they needed the 60 to not lift the sanctions

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What about those indictments that were filed right around when Sessions was let go?  Aren't those still sealed?  Do they expire or have to be renewed?  That might tell us when the next shoe falls.

 
dozer said:
NEW: Senate just BLOCKED a Chuck Schumer measure that would prevent the Trump admin from lifting sanctions on three firms linked to Russian oligarch and Putin ally Oleg Deripaska. The vote in the GOP-led Senate was 57-42, short of the 60 needed to move it to a final vote.

These 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to advance the Schumer resolution related to sanctions on Russian firms *Boozman *Collins *Cotton *Daines *Gardner *Hawley *Kennedy *Moran *McSally *Rubio *Sasse

The Twitters
Click to expand...
:jawdrop:

Just kidding. Nothing surprises any more.

 
Mr. Ham said:
dozer said:
NEW: Senate just BLOCKED a Chuck Schumer measure that would prevent the Trump admin from lifting sanctions on three firms linked to Russian oligarch and Putin ally Oleg Deripaska. The vote in the GOP-led Senate was 57-42, short of the 60 needed to move it to a final vote.

These 11 Republicans voted with Democrats to advance the Schumer resolution related to sanctions on Russian firms *Boozman *Collins *Cotton *Daines *Gardner *Hawley *Kennedy *Moran *McSally *Rubio *Sasse

The Twitters
Click to expand...
What the everloving ####!????!!!!
Click to expand...
We have never seen this level of widespread corruption and duplicity in the entire history of the United States.

 
Sinn Fein said:
Senators still need to find 3 votes - soon - to reverse Treasury's decision to rescind sanctions.

I fear a lot of those 11 votes were just for show - "Hey we tried.  Sorry.  :shrug:  "
Click to expand...


Sinn Fein said:
This is a game by the GOP.

You see a lot or Purple Sens voting here - and will raise their hand at election time to say they tried.  But the GOP, as a party, does not look like they are going to let this pass.

Its all for show.
Click to expand...


Sinn Fein said:
Romney - Exactly.

Public does not want to reduce sanctions on Russia.  If you are a secure GOP - you don't care what the people want, you care what the party wants.  And the party wants to back Trump and reduce sanctions here.

But if you are in a Purple state, where you could actually lose an election - you want to be on the same side as the public.
Click to expand...

 
Sinn Fein said:
I am pretty sure I covered this above.  These were all for show.  The GOP never had any intention of keeping the sanctions on...
Click to expand...
No doubt.

What I mean is, what are these people supposed to say when a reporter asked them why they voted no?

I mean we all know it's to protect Trump and the rest of Russia's interests in the GOP, but they obviously can't say that.

 
Skoo said:
No doubt.

What I mean is, what are these people supposed to say when a reporter asked them why they voted no?

I mean we all know it's to protect Trump and the rest of Russia's interests in the GOP, but they obviously can't say that.
Click to expand...
They will say the sanctions are on  Deripaska, and he has shifted some assets around, and now owns less of the sanctioned companies - so there is no reason to sanction the companies.

 
Skoo said:
I'd sure love to hear the reasoning from those that opposed...

Seriously though, how do you explain that vote?
Click to expand...
they're getting paid by Russia or perhaps Russia has dirt on them from the hacking of the R's....there is no realistic justification for the lessening of any sanctions on Russia who continues hacking us to this day.  what a joke...traitors.

 
Banger said:
they're getting paid by Russia or perhaps Russia has dirt on them from the hacking of the R's....there is no realistic justification for the lessening of any sanctions on Russia who continues hacking us to this day.  what a joke...traitors.
Click to expand...
The EU is in favor of lifting sanctions as a way of protecting thousands of their workers in those companies.  It's not all black and white.

 
Sinn Fein said:
Public does not want to reduce sanctions on Russia.  If you are a secure GOP - you don't care what the people want, you care what the party wants.  And the party wants to back Trump and reduce sanctions here.

But if you are in a Purple state, where you could actually lose an election - you want to be on the same side as the public.
Click to expand...
Apparently at least 4 GOP Sens, Risch, Cornyn, Blunt and Burr, did not vote at all.

 
I have a friend who is endlessly entertained by stories of corruption, in part because of another friend of his who lives in Costa Rica or Honduras and regularly regales my friend with tales of local corruption. I've told him that just because you don't have to pay the county clerk a bribe to get your building permit (hold those jokes) doesn't mean we don't have plenty of corruption of our own. Ours is just baked in to the rules and designed to protect those with the most money and influence in perfectly legal ways.

 
That one guy said:
You’re just trying to keep everyone’s eye off the real prize and grab the thrown shoe incident of 2008 as a value pick in the late 3rd/early 4th
Click to expand...
I just did not want to be That one guy.

:shrug:

Christie using a state beach, and being photographed, while it was closed due to a State Government Shutdown will be the SOD!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
dozer
Ret. Lt. Gen Mike Flynn
2 3
Replies
104
Views
3K
Genxersrule
G
G
Mueller Investigation - Common Misconceptions (1-10)
Replies
0
Views
196
Guest
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 11 (members: 0, guests: 11)
Top